PDA

View Full Version : So can raider get nerfed already?



CRIMS0NM0NKEY
08-16-2019, 06:25 AM
He's breaking dominion.

AmonDarkGod
08-16-2019, 07:15 AM
He's breaking dominion.

Not Just Dominion the whole game

Rhyza.
08-16-2019, 07:21 AM
Dude, they nerfed Nobu because 'she's good at clearing minions.' Their new character is just another spam bot. What makes you think, in this current age of brainless creation and nerfs, they have ANY idea what to do with Raider?

Tyrjo
08-16-2019, 07:37 AM
Dude, they nerfed Nobu because 'she's good at clearing minions.' Their new character is just another spam bot. What makes you think, in this current age of brainless creation and nerfs, they have ANY idea what to do with Raider?

I think they do actually. He does slightly too much damage for the versatility in his kit and his delayed ST is too fast.

Rhyza.
08-16-2019, 07:42 AM
I think they do actually. He does slightly too much damage for the versatility in his kit and his delayed ST is too fast.

No no, I get it. I understand where the posts come from, I just have little faith in the devs actually doing something about it without bringing the nerf bat. When a character needs a chisel to fine tune what they have, devs usually bring a sledgehammer. Like Nobu.

AmonDarkGod
08-16-2019, 07:57 AM
No no, I get it. I understand where the posts come from, I just have little faith in the devs actually doing something about it without bringing the nerf bat. When a character needs a chisel to fine tune what they have, devs usually bring a sledgehammer. Like Nobu.

Or shinobi

Siegfried-Z
08-16-2019, 09:15 AM
Raider isnt only at the top of stats. I think this is maybe the first time since lunch we have a heroe without even a single negative match up.

Poor Gladiator has 25% win rate against him thats a very huge gap.

But btw, the only nerf he needs is a dmg one Imo.
Combo zone should be nerf by 10dmg and all heavies by 5dmg because with his current aoe and kit thats really too easy for him to makes huge dmg in a short time.

Plus devs can understand they have to be carefull with some heroes like Ara because despite good stats he is at the bottom of their top tier list.

But Raider sit at the top of stats AND is S tier in these list. They should see this as a red warning they should fix asap.

Knight_Raime
08-16-2019, 02:36 PM
Raider isnt only at the top of stats. I think this is maybe the first time since lunch we have a heroe without even a single negative match up.

Poor Gladiator has 25% win rate against him thats a very huge gap.

But btw, the only nerf he needs is a dmg one Imo.
Combo zone should be nerf by 10dmg and all heavies by 5dmg because with his current aoe and kit thats really too easy for him to makes huge dmg in a short time.

Plus devs can understand they have to be carefull with some heroes like Ara because despite good stats he is at the bottom of their top tier list.

But Raider sit at the top of stats AND is S tier in these list. They should see this as a red warning they should fix asap.

As is with last time they showed us stats win rates are irrelevant because the way they obtain the data is flawed.

The only useful info from their stats that you can use is pick rates.

snow-halation.
08-16-2019, 04:21 PM
He needs a damage nerf and a nerf to his 300ms stunning tap. literally the fastest attack in the game AND it stuns and drains stam. it's just too good and rewarding for how easy it is to land with it being the fastest attack in the entire game

Baggin_
08-16-2019, 04:32 PM
As is with last time they showed us stats win rates are irrelevant because the way they obtain the data is flawed.

The only useful info from their stats that you can use is pick rates.

How is something as easy as getting win percentages flawed?

Knight_Raime
08-16-2019, 04:36 PM
How is something as easy as getting win percentages flawed?

https://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveForHonor/comments/cqyr8l/here_we_go_again_the_state_of_balance_win_rate/

It's a lot to read and I suggest that you actually read all the links.

Siegfried-Z
08-16-2019, 04:37 PM
As is with last time they showed us stats win rates are irrelevant because the way they obtain the data is flawed.

The only useful info from their stats that you can use is pick rates.

What is the way they collect it ? Dont remember.

Anyway, i would be surprise they keep working on these stats each seasons if it means nothing.

I would add that most major balancing problems in the game (heroes OP or UP) have been felt in the stats each Times so far.

Raider is another example. We cant say these Raider stats are wrong looking at how the almost entire community agreed he needed and still need some.nerfs.

Edit : i am going to read your reddit link when i can.

AmonDarkGod
08-16-2019, 04:37 PM
He needs a damage nerf and a nerf to his 300ms stunning tap. literally the fastest attack in the game AND it stuns and drains stam. it's just too good and rewarding for how easy it is to land with it being the fastest attack in the entire game

Lawbringer's impale is the same speed

Knight_Raime
08-16-2019, 04:53 PM
What is the way they collect it ? Dont remember.

Anyway, i would be surprise they keep working on these stats each seasons if it means nothing.

I would add that most major balancing problems in the game (heroes OP or UP) have been felt in the stats each Times so far.

Raider is another example. We cant say these Raider stats are wrong looking at how the almost entire community agreed he needed and still need some.nerfs.

Edit : i am going to read your reddit link when i can.


Win rates are flawed because there are several independent variables that impact them. And thus make any data gained from win rates alone statistically worthless.
Win rate in this game determines your skill rating which is the flaw. It would be like doing a study based on what % of the population is depressed and then pulling your sample from only doctors offices. (this is spaniards exact example.)


There are a few situations that pretty clearly show just how flawed it can be.

Like A warden main placing in plat or above. Is that person in plat or above because he's good or because warden is strong?

What if warden gets nerfed into the ground next season and the warden player is not doing good anymore in duels? Is it because he was nerfed? Or is it because he's now facing better opponents with a worse kit?

What if those players beating him are beating him with a factually worse hero like say centurion? Does that mean centurion's a better hero than warden?

etc.

In 4's there are other factors in play. Like who works well with who. You could have a high score and wins with a statistically terrible hero because you farmed mid the whole game and your team kept enemies off of you. Or you can have a good game where you go 12 and 0 but because you lost due to your team playing bad the data could show that your statistically proven strong hero is actually weak because you're experiencing lots of losses. 4's is more about what a team does than what an individual hero is capable of. So if you only care about the wins when looking at 4's you're missing a lot of information.

edit: I wanted the link to be read because it gives much better and clearer information than I do rather than just going off of my some what of a summary. The problem really is just calling it "state of balance." If the data was purely being shown just for showing sake then it wouldn't matter. But because people take the win rate data to correlate who's needing to be adjusted we have issues.

We know the devs don't use this data alone for balancing decisions. It's the fact that they show win rate at all that's the problem.

Baggin_
08-16-2019, 04:55 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/CompetitiveForHonor/comments/cqyr8l/here_we_go_again_the_state_of_balance_win_rate/

It's a lot to read and I suggest that you actually read all the links.

Ah, I misunderstood. It's not the way they get their win statistics that's flawed. It's using win statistics in general as a way to balance the game that's flawed.

I agree with that.

Knight_Raime
08-16-2019, 05:05 PM
Ah, I misunderstood. It's not the way they get their win statistics that's flawed. It's using win statistics in general as a way to balance the game that's flawed.

I agree with that.

it's both actually. In duels ranks are picked by win rate and skill rating is also picked by win rates. In duels this doesn't account for match ups. It doesn't show or care about the difference between someone who's meta picking versus someone who mains a hero. When balance changes happen this throws things through a loop even more. Because you could have someone who ranked high now losing either because their kit got worse or another kit got better. Which means you could have a situation like a centurion winning against a warden and the data would show that centurion is better than warden. Even though that's mechanically false.

In 4's individual kit benefits do not matter as much as team play. You could very easily take aramusha to mid and farm minions the whole game while your team protects you. This would sky rocket mushu's win rate falsely representing his kit. You could also take Black prior and go 20 kills with zero deaths and having nothing but losses on him because your team doesn't grasp the fundementals of 4's and thus causes you to lose a lot. There are a lot of factors that play into having both a good composition for a team and winning in 4's. And if you only look at wins when looking at kit performance in 4's you're basically missing a lot of data.

Baggin_
08-16-2019, 05:18 PM
it's both actually. In duels ranks are picked by win rate and skill rating is also picked by win rates. In duels this doesn't account for match ups. It doesn't show or care about the difference between someone who's meta picking versus someone who mains a hero. When balance changes happen this throws things through a loop even more. Because you could have someone who ranked high now losing either because their kit got worse or another kit got better. Which means you could have a situation like a centurion winning against a warden and the data would show that centurion is better than warden. Even though that's mechanically false.

In 4's individual kit benefits do not matter as much as team play. You could very easily take aramusha to mid and farm minions the whole game while your team protects you. This would sky rocket mushu's win rate falsely representing his kit. You could also take Black prior and go 20 kills with zero deaths and having nothing but losses on him because your team doesn't grasp the fundementals of 4's and thus causes you to lose a lot. There are a lot of factors that play into having both a good composition for a team and winning in 4's. And if you only look at wins when looking at kit performance in 4's you're basically missing a lot of data.

Makes perfect sense.

In my eyes though, the whole balancing thing can just be thrown right out of the window. At this point I don't think they'll be able to balance the game the way they want to.

What they should of done from the start was making your classes (heavy, assassin vanguard and hybrids) and giving each class rules to follow in their kits. Balance out the rules first, for example heavies get hyper armor, assassin's get deflects, fast attacks, dodge attacks and vanguard's get bashes (or roughly something like that).

They threw all of that out of the window when they started giving every class the same kind of properties. So now we've got this melting pot of mechanics that should be class specific that's in every class. It's just this jumbled hole they've dug themselves into.

Ubisoft however has a pretty good track record with sequels though, so maybe if they make For Honor 2 from the ground up with the knowledge they have now it'll be something spectacular.

Siegfried-Z
08-16-2019, 07:31 PM
Win rates are flawed because there are several independent variables that impact them. And thus make any data gained from win rates alone statistically worthless.
Win rate in this game determines your skill rating which is the flaw. It would be like doing a study based on what % of the population is depressed and then pulling your sample from only doctors offices. (this is spaniards exact example.)


There are a few situations that pretty clearly show just how flawed it can be.

Like A warden main placing in plat or above. Is that person in plat or above because he's good or because warden is strong?

What if warden gets nerfed into the ground next season and the warden player is not doing good anymore in duels? Is it because he was nerfed? Or is it because he's now facing better opponents with a worse kit?

What if those players beating him are beating him with a factually worse hero like say centurion? Does that mean centurion's a better hero than warden?

etc.

In 4's there are other factors in play. Like who works well with who. You could have a high score and wins with a statistically terrible hero because you farmed mid the whole game and your team kept enemies off of you. Or you can have a good game where you go 12 and 0 but because you lost due to your team playing bad the data could show that your statistically proven strong hero is actually weak because you're experiencing lots of losses. 4's is more about what a team does than what an individual hero is capable of. So if you only care about the wins when looking at 4's you're missing a lot of information.

edit: I wanted the link to be read because it gives much better and clearer information than I do rather than just going off of my some what of a summary. The problem really is just calling it "state of balance." If the data was purely being shown just for showing sake then it wouldn't matter. But because people take the win rate data to correlate who's needing to be adjusted we have issues.

We know the devs don't use this data alone for balancing decisions. It's the fact that they show win rate at all that's the problem.

I get the point.

Its true some major things can impact 4s data.

In 1v1 data are less flawed but its true some win or loss can be related to the player and not to the heroe.

But if we consider that among the top 4% data their are not huge skills gap between most players outside of a plat player against a GM then this spreadsheet is more accurate.

I understand these stats should be taken carefully and not just as they are thats why the devs dont only used them for balancing. The way they label it is then not the smartest i agree.

But still they doesnt deserve to be thrown to trashbox either.

OP being about Raider, i think we can say these Raider stats are overall correct without being 100% accurate of course.

But as they are not for all the others heroes, if he is at the top and PK/Glad at the bottom then there is a minimum of logic in these figures while there are some surprise each season like Valk for this last one.

Knight_Raime
08-16-2019, 10:02 PM
Makes perfect sense.

In my eyes though, the whole balancing thing can just be thrown right out of the window. At this point I don't think they'll be able to balance the game the way they want to.

What they should of done from the start was making your classes (heavy, assassin vanguard and hybrids) and giving each class rules to follow in their kits. Balance out the rules first, for example heavies get hyper armor, assassin's get deflects, fast attacks, dodge attacks and vanguard's get bashes (or roughly something like that).

They threw all of that out of the window when they started giving every class the same kind of properties. So now we've got this melting pot of mechanics that should be class specific that's in every class. It's just this jumbled hole they've dug themselves into.

Ubisoft however has a pretty good track record with sequels though, so maybe if they make For Honor 2 from the ground up with the knowledge they have now it'll be something spectacular.


I disagree. The balance overall has def got better. But that's really a moot point. We know the devs don't only use this info. The issue lies with even presenting the player base with said data when it's statistically useless. The only meaningful data we can say they do show is pick rates. I'm more concerned with what the community does with said data than the devs.


I get the point.

Its true some major things can impact 4s data.

In 1v1 data are less flawed but its true some win or loss can be related to the player and not to the heroe.

But if we consider that among the top 4% data their are not huge skills gap between most players outside of a plat player against a GM then this spreadsheet is more accurate.

I understand these stats should be taken carefully and not just as they are thats why the devs dont only used them for balancing. The way they label it is then not the smartest i agree.

But still they doesnt deserve to be thrown to trashbox either.

OP being about Raider, i think we can say these Raider stats are overall correct without being 100% accurate of course.

But as they are not for all the others heroes, if he is at the top and PK/Glad at the bottom then there is a minimum of logic in these figures while there are some surprise each season like Valk for this last one.

Nah actually the skill gap even in grand masters can very quite widely. Maybe not back when ranked was first dropped. But it certainly is now with it's low population. You have also content creators that are in grand masters that are in different skill brackets. Like. As long as the devs are only looking at wins with nothing else influencing their data said data is useless. One easy thing they could do to make results a bit more in line is if they use a filter based on time played and time picked with said hero versus other people in a similar boat. And then look at the outliers who don't fit into that group. You could glimpse a lot more from that setup than just looking at wins alone.

I'd say the raider data isn't 100% accurate. His win rates anywhere would be inflated due to the fact that he was just reworked. More people playing with him while playing with the new setup will absolutely skew results. In order to get an accurate read on where he'd be we'd have to see how he performs this season post stamina nerfs/removal of dodge GB. Almost anytime a hero is reworked that season shows said hero being higher than they likely will end up. Which is why the devs tend to not put much weight on the data reflecting new/reworked heros in the season they were reworked.

Siegfried-Z
08-16-2019, 10:27 PM
I disagree. The balance overall has def got better. But that's really a moot point. We know the devs don't only use this info. The issue lies with even presenting the player base with said data when it's statistically useless. The only meaningful data we can say they do show is pick rates. I'm more concerned with what the community does with said data than the devs.



Nah actually the skill gap even in grand masters can very quite widely. Maybe not back when ranked was first dropped. But it certainly is now with it's low population. You have also content creators that are in grand masters that are in different skill brackets. Like. As long as the devs are only looking at wins with nothing else influencing their data said data is useless. One easy thing they could do to make results a bit more in line is if they use a filter based on time played and time picked with said hero versus other people in a similar boat. And then look at the outliers who don't fit into that group. You could glimpse a lot more from that setup than just looking at wins alone.

I'd say the raider data isn't 100% accurate. His win rates anywhere would be inflated due to the fact that he was just reworked. More people playing with him while playing with the new setup will absolutely skew results. In order to get an accurate read on where he'd be we'd have to see how he performs this season post stamina nerfs/removal of dodge GB. Almost anytime a hero is reworked that season shows said hero being higher than they likely will end up. Which is why the devs tend to not put much weight on the data reflecting new/reworked heros in the season they were reworked.

Maybe they keep more accurate figures just for us and dont want to share all of them with the community. Or maybe they just dont want to improve their setup.

I agree the season a heroe has been rework isnt the best to look at his performance.
But anyway Raider already was top 3 in 4s and is going to stay that high because in exchange to his stempade he got some unecessary dmg buff and then some improvments which makes him a lot better in 1v1.

Raider rework is still one of the most unfair so far Imo. They clearly makes him in a way they knew they gave him buff he didnt need and they knew they would have to nerf him.
I dont understand how they were able to makes a Smart rework as LB while stupidly overbuffing Raider.

But complaining about the past doesnt help and is pointless. Atm Imo they should just nerf his dmg.. thats pretty obvious Raider dmg are too high considering how thats easy for him to score them.

Not so long ago i've seen you saying this as well so i think we agree on that regardless of these stats.

bLACK.bEACH
08-17-2019, 12:05 PM
Honestly, I still hate the rework. But keeping your guard up as much as possible and just take the side heavies, or react to those instead of trying to react to the stun tap cause thats nearly impossible unless you predict it right is what I do. I still get beat up a lot, but its better than being stunned for 95% of the fight,

Vakris_One
08-17-2019, 03:30 PM
I get the point.

Its true some major things can impact 4s data.

In 1v1 data are less flawed but its true some win or loss can be related to the player and not to the heroe.

But if we consider that among the top 4% data their are not huge skills gap between most players outside of a plat player against a GM then this spreadsheet is more accurate.
On the contrary. There are huge skill gaps between platinum and Grand Master. Even in Grand Master there exist some not insignificant gaps in skill, particularly amongst the different global regions. The best duelists in the entire game are primarily from EU and North America for example, which the statistics do not show context for. Another thing the statistics jumble together is PC and Console, which is another problem that tends to skew the stats for certain heroes.

Frankly, the win matrix is one big generilisation. As I have said before it would be infinitely more useful if the statistics were presented in a more specific manner.
- PC only win rates and pick rates
- Console only win rates and pick rates
- Platinum and Diamond only win rates
- Master and GM only win rates.

etc.

Presented to us in one big jumbled heap without specific contextualisation is next to useless.



I understand these stats should be taken carefully and not just as they are thats why the devs dont only used them for balancing. The way they label it is then not the smartest i agree.

But still they doesnt deserve to be thrown to trashbox either.

OP being about Raider, i think we can say these Raider stats are overall correct without being 100% accurate of course.

But as they are not for all the others heroes, if he is at the top and PK/Glad at the bottom then there is a minimum of logic in these figures while there are some surprise each season like Valk for this last one.
They can be overall correct, sure, but only as an overall generilised look into the majority of the playerbase across all platforms. Do the majority of players struggle against this hero or not? Yes/No. Are the majority of players bad at the game? Definite yes. What do we ultimately learn from casting such a wide net? Nothing that is of specific or valuable worth because the context for the statistics is not presented to us.

Siegfried-Z
08-17-2019, 04:23 PM
On the contrary. There are huge skill gaps between platinum and Grand Master. Even in Grand Master there exist some not insignificant gaps in skill, particularly amongst the different global regions. The best duelists in the entire game are primarily from EU and North America for example, which the statistics do not show context for. Another thing the statistics jumble together is PC and Console, which is another problem that tends to skew the stats for certain heroes.

Frankly, the win matrix is one big generilisation. As I have said before it would be infinitely more useful if the statistics were presented in a more specific manner.
- PC only win rates and pick rates
- Console only win rates and pick rates
- Platinum and Diamond only win rates
- Master and GM only win rates.

etc.

Presented to us in one big jumbled heap without specific contextualisation is next to useless.


They can be overall correct, sure, but only as an overall generilised look into the majority of the playerbase across all platforms. Do the majority of players struggle against this hero or not? Yes/No. Are the majority of players bad at the game? Definite yes. What do we ultimately learn from casting such a wide net? Nothing that is of specific or valuable worth because the context for the statistics is not presented to us.

Its been a while since we all agree these stats would be far more interesting if split in the way you just talk about.
Thats sure.

The problem is they would maybe not have enough data for some heroe for example in the Master/GM PC Gladiator, Nuxia or PK one ... it may be better each seasons with all rework/buff because buffing the weakiest heroe increase their pickrate thought.

Majority of the player are bad, thats why i dont even look at the full pop data.
But looking at top 4% one means this is a data collected from only decent players considering someone in the top 4% means he is at least arround Diamond 3/4 and by definition a decent player.

To sum up, again i agree these stats has to be look at carefull.
It may be flawed for some heroes but not for all of them. These Raider stats are not surprising

DeamonXII
08-17-2019, 05:35 PM
I say nerf his hyper armor and fix his stunning tap

AmonDarkGod
08-17-2019, 05:44 PM
I say nerf his hyper armor and fix his stunning tap

His HA is fine his damage is what needs to be fixed

DeamonXII
08-17-2019, 06:27 PM
i say put his heavy follow up hyper armor the same as highlander or warlord heavy follow up

DeamonXII
08-17-2019, 06:28 PM
i say he is the same as hito but he only able to access his hyper armor on chain heavy and if you say follow up should have hyper armor on start up then say that to warlord and highlander and make their heavy follow up hyper armor faster/on start up too

AmonDarkGod
08-17-2019, 06:40 PM
i say he is the same as hito but he only able to access his hyper armor on chain heavy and if you say follow up should have hyper armor on start up then say that to warlord and highlander and make their heavy follow up hyper armor faster/on start up too

He is nothing like Hito tho. Hito has more HA and a lot less damage. Also Hito has 30 heavy on all sides even light punish. Raider has 40 light punish and 45 top heavy, 50 damage chain Zone and 90 OOS punish. Hito only has 60. And Raider is faster with his 333 stun tap and ffeints and stampede charge.

Knight_Raime
08-17-2019, 06:55 PM
Maybe they keep more accurate figures just for us and dont want to share all of them with the community. Or maybe they just dont want to improve their setup.

I agree the season a heroe has been rework isnt the best to look at his performance.
But anyway Raider already was top 3 in 4s and is going to stay that high because in exchange to his stempade he got some unecessary dmg buff and then some improvments which makes him a lot better in 1v1.

Raider rework is still one of the most unfair so far Imo. They clearly makes him in a way they knew they gave him buff he didnt need and they knew they would have to nerf him.
I dont understand how they were able to makes a Smart rework as LB while stupidly overbuffing Raider.

But complaining about the past doesnt help and is pointless. Atm Imo they should just nerf his dmg.. thats pretty obvious Raider dmg are too high considering how thats easy for him to score them.

Not so long ago i've seen you saying this as well so i think we agree on that regardless of these stats.

His damage "could" be adjusted. But I don't think it's really needed unless we take a global stance against punishes. As his are not outliers at all. More heros have high punishes than don't.

Personally i'd prefer the nerf he gets is removing the ability to apply the blind while a blind effect is still active. That alone should make tap a lot less oppressive for general players. And the one buff i'd like is if his chain finishers could chain into chained zone instead of just replacing his finishers. Would give him more mix up potential which he kind of needs atm.

Vakris_One
08-18-2019, 03:32 AM
His damage "could" be adjusted. But I don't think it's really needed unless we take a global stance against punishes. As his are not outliers at all. More heros have high punishes than don't.

Personally i'd prefer the nerf he gets is removing the ability to apply the blind while a blind effect is still active. That alone should make tap a lot less oppressive for general players. And the one buff i'd like is if his chain finishers could chain into chained zone instead of just replacing his finishers. Would give him more mix up potential which he kind of needs atm.
Diminishing returns on the blind from stun tap would be a good change. I don't think he needs his finishers to chain into his chained zone. Reducing his stamina costs would give him a better quality of life buff so that he can actually use his zone into stun tap opener and be able to go into his mixups afterwards instead of having to stop after only a single offensive mixup.

Personally I want to understand why his knee strike after shoulder carry into wall splat does 15 damage while JJ got all damage from his ***** slap after choke removed. They need to normalise these mechanics. Either Raider's knee should be brought down to 10 damage and JJ given 10 damage on slap or all of these moves should do no damage.

Finally I think people need to remember for a minute that these stats are from the freshly reworked Raider. When he still had his massive stamina drain from shoulder carry, stam reset to 20 from stun tap and his dodge GB, which made him a hard counter to any hero with bash based openers. It is no surprise that his stats would have been obscenely high because freshly reworked Raider was indeed obscene. He has since had considerable tweaks however with only a few small tweaks still needed. With the major caveat being: unless they plan on buffing other heroes to his level.

Hormly
08-18-2019, 04:10 AM
Nerf his pecs

iadvisoryi
08-19-2019, 06:09 AM
I'm not reading any of this cess pool, I'm just gonna say raider is obscenely busted, right along with hitokuri and anyone defending said characters are completely delusional. You fight raider, you won't have your eyes the whole fight, you fight hito, they armor through you and combo off it. Not to mention raiders damage, hitos 100-0 stamina.

#buffMyBoyBlackPrior

I know he's an amazing character already. But give my boy a longer lasting bulwark stance or something. It's so inconsistent.

:P

AmonDarkGod
08-19-2019, 06:53 AM
I'm not reading any of this cess pool, I'm just gonna say raider is obscenely busted, right along with hitokuri and anyone defending said characters are completely delusional. You fight raider, you won't have your eyes the whole fight, you fight hito, they armor through you and combo off it. Not to mention raiders damage, hitos 100-0 stamina.

#buffMyBoyBlackPrior

I know he's an amazing character already. But give my boy a longer lasting bulwark stance or something. It's so inconsistent.

:P

Black Prior is stronger than both Raider and Hitokiri and you want him buffed? Nice one...

Rhyza.
08-19-2019, 07:42 AM
Black Prior is stronger than both Raider and Hitokiri and you want him buffed? Nice one...

This made me giggle. Stronger than Raider. You made a funny.

Again, not much faith in the devs balancing things out, one way or another. Them disemboweling my Nobu like they did soured me completely.

Now, why not throw out some ideas on HOW to balance Raider?

CRIMS0NM0NKEY
08-19-2019, 07:58 AM
BP needs a buff or a whole lot of heros need a Nerf.

Siegfried-Z
08-19-2019, 08:36 AM
I'm not reading any of this cess pool, I'm just gonna say raider is obscenely busted, right along with hitokuri and anyone defending said characters are completely delusional. You fight raider, you won't have your eyes the whole fight, you fight hito, they armor through you and combo off it. Not to mention raiders damage, hitos 100-0 stamina.

#buffMyBoyBlackPrior

I know he's an amazing character already. But give my boy a longer lasting bulwark stance or something. It's so inconsistent.

:P


BP needs a buff or a whole lot of heros need a Nerf.

Guys asking for a BP buff really doesnt give you credit.
BP is strong. End of the story.

Saying that while asking a Raider nerf (while i agree he need it) only makes you look bias.

iadvisoryi
08-19-2019, 09:41 AM
Guys asking for a BP buff really doesnt give you credit.
BP is strong. End of the story.

Saying that while asking a Raider nerf (while i agree he need it) only makes you look bias.

My guy, raider and prior are on two very different levels. Raider is legitimately the fastest character in the game with 40+damage heavies and a unreactable blind..... Prior has .. bashes..? A flip that fails half the time, good feats. Idk how you can even compare the two.

Also yes prior is fine where he is, I just wish I could utilize the stance/flip more, it's satisfying, but leaves you completely open for a gb punish.

Siegfried-Z
08-19-2019, 10:29 AM
I'm not reading any of this cess pool, I'm just gonna say raider is obscenely busted, right along with hitokuri and anyone defending said characters are completely delusional. You fight raider, you won't have your eyes the whole fight, you fight hito, they armor through you and combo off it. Not to mention raiders damage, hitos 100-0 stamina.

#buffMyBoyBlackPrior

I know he's an amazing character already. But give my boy a longer lasting bulwark stance or something. It's so inconsistent.

:P


My guy, raider and prior are on two very different levels. Raider is legitimately the fastest character in the game with 40+damage heavies and a unreactable blind..... Prior has .. bashes..? A flip that fails half the time, good feats. Idk how you can even compare the two.

Also yes prior is fine where he is, I just wish I could utilize the stance/flip more, it's satisfying, but leaves you completely open for a gb punish.

I am rep11 BP while i dont play Raider at all, i dont like him.
Again, Raider needs a DMG nerf, yes.

But i am not comparing the two, you talk about the two of them yourself in your own previous post. Thats why i said, yes complaining about Raider is legit.. but it doesnt mean an A tier heroe like BP needs Buffs. Just stay objective.

AmonDarkGod
08-19-2019, 11:34 AM
This made me giggle. Stronger than Raider. You made a funny.

Again, not much faith in the devs balancing things out, one way or another. Them disemboweling my Nobu like they did soured me completely.

Now, why not throw out some ideas on HOW to balance Raider?

Sure first of all his damage is way too overtuned he needs a balance nerf. Also his stunning tap should not be delayed to be 333ms. Some of his animations are wonky but other than that he is fine

Knight_Raime
08-19-2019, 03:58 PM
My guy, raider and prior are on two very different levels. Raider is legitimately the fastest character in the game with 40+damage heavies and a unreactable blind..... Prior has .. bashes..? A flip that fails half the time, good feats. Idk how you can even compare the two.

Also yes prior is fine where he is, I just wish I could utilize the stance/flip more, it's satisfying, but leaves you completely open for a gb punish.

Raider, shaman, and BP are all staple picks for the current comp meta in 4's atm. They are on par in a lot of areas with each other. And slightly differ in others.

CRIMS0NM0NKEY
08-19-2019, 04:01 PM
Raider, shaman, and BP are all staple picks for the current comp meta in 4's atm. They are on par in a lot of areas with each other. And slightly differ in others.
I disagree. Shamon and BP are sorly lacking compared to raider

Knight_Raime
08-19-2019, 05:02 PM
I disagree. Shamon and BP are sorly lacking compared to raider

Shaman is still one of the strongest gankers in the entire game and one of the easiest to enable that pretty much guarantee's death to the person if bit. There is a reason she is still ran in a lot of scrims. Black prior was placed as a staple pretty early on. Very good at stalling, very good at anti gank, decent mid clear, strong set of feats. Again he's pretty much run by most top setups who scrim.

Raider can't keep his offense going because of his stamina costs and has zero defensive tools. What has him up top is primarily his feats and ganking/team fight potential. His offense isn't nearly as strong because people at that level are capable of react blocking/parrying stunning tap in a 1v1 scenario. You can very easily deal with raider's offense by blocking side and switching to top on indicator. Chained zone isn't super strong because you can light/zone the moment you see orange. The only truly decent pressure he has from neutral is his zone into gb or tap. But that eats his stamina.

Not saying Raider isn't strong. But I AM saying you don't know 4's competitively.

AmonDarkGod
08-19-2019, 05:18 PM
I disagree. Shamon and BP are sorly lacking compared to raider

BP is a lot stronger than Raider since he has both offense and decent defense. Yet Raider's overtuned damage gives him the edge if BP misses a parry or flip attempt...

Amerikanovich
08-19-2019, 05:31 PM
I disagree. Shamon and BP are sorly lacking compared to raider

Comparatively, yes, I think you're both right xD
Shaman and BP are very solid characters, and in my opinion in a very good spot, so it's clear that they are popular picks.
Raider is still stronger than both, which also explains the pick rate.

I think the main problem with raider is simply the ludicrous amount of damage he can dish out consistently, people are screaming about Jorm's hammerslam, but in the time he manages to pull that off once, the typical raider has already landed 3-4 40 damage heavies and several stuns.
It's just unnecessary.

UbiInsulin
08-22-2019, 03:48 PM
Deleted a few posts that were not germane to the subject at hand.

Don't take threads off-track with flaming please!

The_B0G_
08-22-2019, 04:05 PM
Deleted a few posts that were not germane to the subject at hand.

Don't take threads off-track with flaming please!

Party pooper.

Knight_Raime
08-22-2019, 04:07 PM
Deleted a few posts that were not germane to the subject at hand.

Don't take threads off-track with flaming please!

Thank you. But I would say you missed the two on the page before this one.

As the first one is a clear shot at another poster and isn't really relevant to what was being discussed between that person and the person that was quoted initially.
And the other is a response to that off topic first post.

I feel leaving those in will only invite more discussion of that kind of stuff by others. Such as it did with me.
But I suppose if you messaged both individuals about their deleted posts and asked them to stay on track that would also work.

UbiInsulin
08-22-2019, 06:06 PM
Thank you. But I would say you missed the two on the page before this one.

As the first one is a clear shot at another poster and isn't really relevant to what was being discussed between that person and the person that was quoted initially.
And the other is a response to that off topic first post.

I feel leaving those in will only invite more discussion of that kind of stuff by others. Such as it did with me.
But I suppose if you messaged both individuals about their deleted posts and asked them to stay on track that would also work.

You're right, those are now deleted too.

Another note (not just directed at Raime or anyone in particular): moderation is not a topic for public discussion and never has been. Send me a PM if you want to talk anything over and I can go over the rationale for my decisions with you.

Knight_Raime
08-22-2019, 06:41 PM
You're right, those are now deleted too.

Another note: moderation is not a topic for public discussion and never has been. Send me a PM if you want to talk anything over.

will do. thanks again.